all u.g.a. protesters better switch or plane tickets because president obama is pulling a fast one and living with the conference at camp david in maryland so what was really behind the change of scenery both question more. we need more troops there are american troops attacked by the enemy have gone up about a thousand percent in the words show and knowing times not on our shot three blind mice three u.s. senators see how they run they all run after war in airstrikes never turned away from a confrontation they didn't like have you ever seen such a thing in your life as three blind mice floral so us senators. so this

is arguably the most pivotal twenty four hour period in this whole race it has all come down to this day folks and forget vasco call it looks like march madness is starting a little early this year for candidates ten states hundreds of delegates up for grabs are republicans really any closer to selecting a nominee. it's tuesday march sixth four pm here in washington d.c. i'm liz wahl and you're watching artsy. well a sudden change of venue for the upcoming g. eight summit the meeting of the world's most powerful leaders was supposed to take place in chicago but the white house has announced it will happen at the presidential retreat in camp david maryland the white house maintains that the new location will provide a more intimate setting but the under usually late change for the international

summit has some wondering what the motives behind it could be some believe this may have something to do with it you're looking at ads promoting massive protests and rallies outside of the jui g. eight summit in chicago the demonstrations have been in the works for months so is this last minute shuffle really an attempt to avoid protests especially as election season is underway all the answer to this and more isn't tashi leonard reporter for salon dot com welcome to talk show so what do you think is behind this change well you know we'll never get a straight answer about what exactly motivated to decision making but it's definitely being read and i think perhaps justifiably so as when sort of protest you predict huge amount of pressure with their comments president so you're talking the context of occupy tens of thousands of people around the country in the world promising to descend on chicago the thing is they still will be going because it's

the nato summit dunk each you gave afterwards so i don't think a lot of protests are planned heading for chicago will change and you know it is election season so could there be a fear that widespread protests could be an embarrassment to the administration. no doubt and i think that's true with a lot of the harsh crackdown surrounding. since the beginning of this year and before that. but i think that's the kind of embarrassment that's unavoidable when not protest from it and doesn't look like it's going to be backing down and talk a little bit. why do you think it was moved from chicago to camp david that specific location in maryland you can do it is it really is a retreat and it's a compound in the middle of words in maryland rural maryland there's very few places where people could converge to protest it's a national park there's no city there's no streets and count david itself entirely

inaccessible it's a thought. so i doubt they'll be a huge effort to protest the camp david g. eight rather people will remain in chicago and focus their efforts on nato but it was this idea that ga nato would be there at the same time create a huge amount of protest that the move away from the g eight and definitely try to dissipate. and how successful do you think this venue change will be and silencing the occupy protesters will not carry a tool i think it people feel that it's a victory that. been made because it seems like their threats have been responded to you but also nato is still going ahead so ever on that plane tickets and rented band places to stay and in burton point you know there's still a reason to go with the nato summit throwing global attention there so i don't

think actually they'll be much during a way of crowds and i don't much interest in this in the crowd between now and in chicago because as i said camp david really inaccessible so since both of these protests are they were both supposed to go on it coincidentally because these two summits were happening in chicago do you expect the protest in chicago to be just as massive just as powerful and just i mean. i do i do you i don't think it will change change much because the momentum is there and really you know these these summits their their way of protest is making him. equality and it's a problem with the leadership we have plain and they use the u.k. asian of a summit to do so but it's really an excuse to do so so the presence of elsewhere won't dissipate your attention that people will want to bring to chicago native but you said you are calling this a victory or it can be seen as

a victory for the occupy protesters but they won't be able to protest outside of g eight so isn't that kind of a blow back for them well you know it's not just the ability to protest to the g. eight leaders it's of the ability to be visible to the well it will be equally available in chicago. i don't think what the occupy movements been very good at is you know it hasn't directed its attention to leaders and asked for. demonstrative or filled it's not direct hits marriageable it's been on the streets connecting to people and making itself visible and so i think the lack of presence of the g eight leaders will make no difference to how much noise and spectacle we will want to take to the streets of chicago. throughout the past weeks and months there has been some speculation that the occupy movement has been dwindling a bear do you think that this may help to get a second wind show and i think you know before that we have calls for

a general strike that are getting a lot of attention excitement for a huge day on may the first which is just before just a few weeks before these summits so i think comes bring time you're going to have to say a wave of action it's no surprise need people didn't want to take to the streets and be out in public squares when it's freezing cold that's to be expected but now the weather is changing and all the planning that's been going on behind closed doors is going to come into fruition with a really exciting spring i think and in terms of these where two of the g. eight protest to camp david in maryland it is just speculation at this point. there's no proof that the reasoning behind it is to avert these protests is that correct that's correct but that's the kind of proof you get the words president obama use to fulfill a teacher free flowing conversation between the g eight leaders and.

the sleep free flowing conversation couldn't happen in this like he plane ascites progress chicago summit and how to be in the retreat at camp david but i don't think we'll ever get a full explanation of the right matushka thank you very much for coming on the show that was natasha lennard reporter at salon dot com. well as the world fear is another war brewing in the middle east we continue to hear pro-war rhetoric coming from republican presidential candidates and we heard a lot of it today at apac influential if you were to lobbying group but there are also key players in congress today that consistently ban together and advocate taking military action on broad john mccain is one of them and just yesterday he said this about how to handle syria the only realistic way to do so is with soren air power. the united states should lead an international effort to protect key percolation centers in syria especially in the north through airstrikes

on assad's forces. now mccain is the first u.s. senator to call on the u.s. to launch air strikes against syria but he certainly is not alone and his hawkish tone are to chorus on a christian president takes a look at a trio that has a long history of friendship and of befriending and toppling dictators they stick together through thick and thin from the queensland to the holy land from the ball field to the battlefield they are senators joseph lieberman and the graham and john mccain seen frequently side by side both physically and politically the call for more war a song almost on repeat for them three haven't met a war they don't like they led the charge to afghanistan we need more troops there are american troops attacked by the enemy have gone up about a thousand percent in the words and one time is not on our side and they've been

called everything from the three amigos the three blind mice and the axis of error by the website downsize d.c. dot org these tend to work together as a block they're going to access and all the foreign policy credit for going back to that old axis of evil that we heard about that foreign policy not just limited to bush's wars here they are meeting with libyan president morgan darkie in august of two thousand and nine at a time when it was in the u.s. interests to call him friend mccain later tweeted this calling him interesting but a year later i wanted him gone if you want to got to go in one of the steps among many would be to establish a no fly zone over the world stand by and allow a leader like would obviously his own people and i'm going target for them iran if we use military action against iran we should. not only go after their nuclear facilities we should just store their ability to make conventional war they should have no planes they can fly and no ships they can float we can point the gun we

haven't pulled a single trigger yet and it's about time that we did the two years on that lack of immediate military action hasn't resulted in armageddon or anything like it still the calls for action expand now across the globe the iranian nuclear program is a threat to the entire world sign military intervention is now the necessary factor to reinforce this option assad needs to know that he will not win and now we find ourselves in commercial in the same identical debate your leader syria what's going on in syria what's happening and how should we respond to it and once again i mean almost kind of low viewer response these guys come and say well we've got to go to war the mood of the american people may have shifted to ending the wars the perpetual body for war does have its supporters they're very popular with the military industrial complex which sees every new adventure every new invasion

every new occupation every new major bombing campaign as an investment but an investment fewer and fewer americans are willing to make as they've already lived through the consequences of the previous military adventures in fact critics say those who continue to follow senators mccain lieberman and graham are blind themselves they may hear the drumbeat for war but they fail to see the bigger picture the very real possibility of pitfalls ahead in washington christine for our team. so we see who the powerful players are when it comes to promoting pro-war agendas and often times spreading democracy is used as the justification for military intervention but sometimes the plan backfires take for example egypt where democracy promotion programs are breeding resentment and suspicion u.s. nonprofit groups recently paid millions to bail out employees. egypt's accuse of an authorized use of foreign funds so is the united states pursuit to spread democracy

instead breeding anti american sentiment abroad and here to talk more about this but harper journalist and photographer for mcclatchy newspapers and legion magazine welcome to the show ben so we are seeing this backlash in egypt is the american quest to spread democracy not go received oftentimes in the middle east. well to some extent it's it's received well by young and modern and liberal groups who would like to see more democracy but the powers that be don't like it because it challenges their authority. it's not uncommon for foreign countries to assist other countries in having their revolution but just remember that when the united states had its own revolution against england in the seventeen ninety's and eighty's rather french troops assisted us without the help of france we might not have ever been independent so the united states sending these democracy people to assist the people in favor of democracy it's often it's

a good thing but it does raise animosity because it is an outside force and once again you're challenging the status quo and why do we see in this case you say this isn't rhetoric outside outside support but why and this case in egypt could we see this breeding this anti-american sentiment. you know i i visited usaid projects not just new democracy projects but clinics and schools and agriculture projects and. keep people feel in a way that when they get foreign aid it's the you merely ation a very proud people the egyptian people and it fills you million into know that even for example the sewer system in cairo was built by the united states government. so it's hard to help i mean the united states has an interest in stability in egypt nobody wants to see people rioting in the streets in egypt a country of eighty million people aside from the fact that it's it's it's morally

wrong to sit by when tragedy strikes. question is how do you help things along the you help things by assisting democracy movements i mean i was told by a former usaid chief that we help people who wanted our help the movement for changed. people who were in tahrir square these people have now been pushed aside and this is the old guard this is mubarak ism without mubarak this is the army this is the brotherhood this is the bureaucracy this is the oligarchies the rich families and they don't want things to change and the. movement people are they're not organized they have they don't have the money and also it's a society in which if you challenge the authority it's not like people will say yeah that's a great thing to do composer who do you think you are so even now with mark has been overthrown egypt is still

a far cry away from achieving democracy you know it's. some say that we should just go with the flow that the brotherhood and the newer party which now have majority in parliament. that they'll become more democratic is they find that they have to serve they have to take care of everybody in the country they can't just be for their own group. i'm not sure that that's going to happen i'm not sure that the army will even let the parliament coven. but the democracy we remember and my angle i did a lot of democracy teaching of journalists in africa and in asia. twenty years ago and what happened was yes every journalist knows that you're supposed to tell the truth you're supposed to interview people from both sides you supposed to have balanced reporting but when you try to do it in many of these countries your editor says why are you crazy or why are you interviewing this man here you know our publisher doesn't like him and you know if you get involved in

a web of conflict and some of the people that i thought even got in trouble lost their jobs because they did what i told them to do to find the information and report it so you have to go slow in many countries and the democracy movement obviously was like the spirit of change i mean here all the people who wanted free press and free assembly and the ability to criticize and the ability also to see the documents and transparency and the traditional egypt has never seen this kind of openness before it's not a part of this system so i guess the lesson there is that a transition to democracy is not something that is going to happen overnight it will take time i also want to ask you there are sometimes democracy there spreading democracy is used as justification to intervene into other countries now at tara later but is there sometimes more to let then just simply wanting to spread democracy. the i worked for

usa id and before that now again i'm a journalist and on all sides all of these counts we stay away from the military i mean in some cases you have to go in with the military for just for survival cases but. no i don't i don't i don't see it as in it as a justification for military intervention i mean it's obvious that we would like to support for let's say for example in libya is not an example to somalia. there are there are places where military is the only solution to the violence of the problems of people but i think that then the aid worker gets left behind. and you know i actually you just mentioned libya and i do want to switch the focus now to libya because there are some new developments there today tribal leaders have the cleric there are tanami in the east pub livia's interim government is opposing the move because they say it will lead to breaking up the african nation so after the death of libyan leader moammar gadhafi is libya any closer to

achieving them are saying. you've got the one hundred thousand dollar question right there. i've spent a lot of time in arab countries and every arab country. the ones i've been in in all the war all of them they all had either a king or a strongman a dictator a general and. the change to democracy is going to be very difficult and very very slow i mean you can say that we the british who basically invented modern democracy started in twelve fifteen with the magna carta which limited the power of the king and it took hundreds of years for it to reach the point where we have parliaments that the over rule with the queen gives a speech and it has to be written by the prime minister of england she can't say a word and that's that's real democracy. how will developed in in libya is really it's an unknown i predicted early on when these things took place these

movements that they would not produce democracy that egypt and many of the arab countries there's there's a lot of fear there's fear of the young generation there's a lot of young people in every country that have no job and they are restrained by fear of the book or out of the police of the authorities and if the authorities are weak the classic example is what happened in this soccer game in suez i think it was where the police step back the crowd saw that there was nobody in charge and they just went on a rampage tracking the other side's fans and i think that that's you know as a as a reporter i stay away from interviewing young angry men of eighteen because you know what they're going to say which range we have to change little bombs out if you talk to a family in their thirty's and they have a couple of kids you see that people are concerned about protecting their families and protecting their children and they they're very cautious they'll they'll go for

stability rather than the democracy that they. so much for coming on the show and laying out some value absolutely did thank you very much that was ben barber a journalist and photographer for mcclatchy newspapers and region that has seen. well it is super tuesday it's considered to be one of the biggest days in the race to be the republican presidential nominee voters will head to the polls in these ten states up for grabs today four hundred nineteen delegates ohio considered to be the most significant since it does have the most delegates now it's not expected that super tuesday will and the g.o.p. race but super tuesday is sure to captivate the mass media airwaves and cost millions and millions of dollars in the ongoing primary spectacle has some wondering when will all the madness our next guest is one of them ben cohen editor for the daily dancer and president of the bands or media group welcome to the show

. so a lot of time a lot of money a lot of attention being paid to the primaries but you say it's all a waste of time you say that it's a waste of time well i mean i think it's pretty clear that romney's going to win this thing this is just a bit of a problem pony show so we can all you know the media can get it's going to take into it have some fun. yeah i mean it's a gigantic waste of money we've spent this spending millions and millions of dollars on this stuff and. the policies of these guys are so severe that there isn't really much that differentiate between any of them we would know who's going to win it's going to be mitt romney so you know that's going to do it and but you do make this argument that the two party system in the u.s. is not sustainable it's not working why not because i think in. in the long run when you have two parties that are so similar so the policies are so it's

very difficult to differentiate between the two parties you've got about three percent difference that's two percent doesn't make a big difference in the in the scheme of things you have programs that you know nothing that will help poor people you have you know the quote the difference between college loans you know the republicans. want banks to college loans for the democrats would rather get straight to the students those policy issues do make a difference but now i think if you look at the votes participation has been going down you have to year after year after year after year and that's been a trend for for decades now and what do you think is behind that trap i think that people the public is just not going what the politicians are selling anymore because it's not real it's not. just some white politics the policies are kind of the if anyone could remember the difference between john kerry's health care plan and george bush's health care plan and i'll give him a medal because i caught a bit of difference because there wasn't really much of a difference and that's the point you know really supposed to know the difference it's just it's

a circus act and i think the longer this goes on for the less and less people are going to be inclined to vote and they don't have to spend more money trying to get people to vote and at the end of the day where does this go when it's very very british president and his kid is just it's not a reversible treaded mess there is a huge change in the system now what is that change in the system that you propose what needs to change propose in the system you have to have company from as for from you have to you have to get money out of politics is the only way to do it you can have a system where the richest kind that it wins but it comes with the most money wins because you always going to have consolidation of corporate interests that get behind the kind that is not going to cater to their particular interests so the only way to stop that to have a genuine candidate is to get money out of politics and speaking of the campaign finance reform and money in politics. that is that we are seeing the funding of super pacs and to what extent do you think that these kinds of campaigns that have

played so far are the funding of these campaigns to what extent have a impacted the election so far they have a huge impacts on the on the campaign i mean it's just if you look at the history of of you know which kind of that gets the most money which candidate wins it's an astonishing correlation between the amount of money spent on account of it in the various different you know they. can raise money through a number of different avenues i make it more complicated than any we have kind of piecemeal. legislation to translate that but there's always a way around. and you can just chart the correlation between because it is the winner because it's of the most money i mean romney is a great example of just how he has a problem is not going to get his own personal fortune behind but he's going to win now i know that you say all these candidates are basically the same and nothing is going to change anyway is there is one candidate ron paul is different from the

others especially when it comes to foreign policy and his anti-war stance what do you may do you make of happens from who's an interesting trend that he's not going to win but he he he tells the truth he does tell the truth i don't think he's right i think his analysis is correct i think his proposals. bordering on kind of signed with the most expensive government doesn't you know let's get rid of the federal reserve i mean this stuff is crazy but his analysis is correct that he's telling the truth and because of his the big he's his ability to convey reality. and he is getting some traction so he's always going to be in the media he was going to get some attention but i don't think you know he. he's going to be around to be robbed of a selection will make a bit of noise who generate some attention he's not serious he's more serious threats of that sort of big money. so what there is some talk you say that there needs to be an alternative to the two party system there is some talk that ron paul

could join a third party what do you make of that and will that change the dynamics will that offered the change that you're looking for what are your thoughts on that i think a third party candidate would be interesting to make a bit of a. but then in the system could he could you have to use the structure of the system corrupters the money makes a difference and in this room paul can raise his most money is what romney or barack obama has no chance of getting it does any of that what's going to be all right well that's all the time we have for today i have a feeling you're not too excited to watch how the primaries play how the day. i think we all can kind of guess how they will play out thank you very much for coming on the show that was ben cohen editor for the daily banter and president of the dancer media group and that is going to do it for now from are the stories we covered you can head on over to our team dot com slash usa and you can also check

out our you tube page it's youtube dot com slash see america you can also follow me on twitter wall the capital account with lauren lyster that's coming up next we'll see right here a five. i passed.

more news today violence is once again flared up. these are the images go horribly and seeing from the streets of canada. sheinkopf orations are all day.